Last night’s Democratic debate between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton kept me on the edge of my seat. Being an Obama girl, I wanted Obama to do well, and I had invited two girlfriends for support. There were only ninety minutes, and lots to cover. The three interviewers took turn asking questions, including some from the public, that had been preselected prior to the debate. Health care, taxes, immigration, and the war on Iraq, of course. Towards the end, Obama was asked about Hollywood, sex and violence. What did he think? The grand finale was a question to both candidates about their dream tickets.
‘What did you think?’ My friend Christine wanted to know what I thought of Obama. I couldn’t help but appreciate Hillary‘s strong performance. Still, our man had done well, especially on the topic of Iraq, and we could be proud. This had been a good debate between two formidable candidates. After my friends left, I rushed to the Huffington Post to leave a few comments for my candidate.
Not until this afternoon did I place the debate in the context of global warming, and realized that not a single question had been asked on the topic. I could understand other people not paying attention, but I, out of all people? I spent the morning answering readers’ comments about the post I wrote yesterday on ‘Global Warming and the Press‘. The irony is simply too much.
How about other journalists? Had they noticed? No mention in Arianna Huffington‘s post on the debate. Same notable absence in the Washington Post, and the New York Times. To the credit of both candidates, a review of the debate’s transcripts shows them mentioning globlal warming in each of their opening statements:
Obama: “Our planet is in peril“
Hillary: “. . . global warming which the U.S. must lead in trying to contend with and reverse.“
That it took me nearly twenty four hours to notice, that the interviewers did not bother with asking the question, and that the media also failed to notice, all three of these facts combined say a lot about our collective state of mind vis a vis global warming.
Did you notice?
I’ve certainly noticed. It’s why in your last post about the difficulties journalists face in communicating the issues of climate change, I was scornful of them.
If you don’t bring it up, if you don’t ask the questions, then they’re not going to be an issue. It’s simple laziness.
I noticed the “mentions” in the opening statements, and I was very happy at first with those. But, it’s bizarre that specific questions about global warming weren’t asked, if that’s the case. (I watched it late at night and slept through part of it.)
I also find it very unfortunate, and very revealing, that key media didn’t comment on the fact that global warming questions weren’t asked. Wow. To me, this relates to the earlier topic, about media coverage. The media seem to have so many excuses. They worry about overdoing it (they aren’t even close!). Take the NY Times: They endorse Hillary Clinton, and in that endorsement they mention nearly every issue except global warming. Then, several days later, the two Democratic presidential contenders are not asked about global warming in a key debate, and no comment (on that) from the Times. The only conclusion I can come to is that they (at the editorial and ownership level) really DON’T get it. Why? I have my theories, but . . .
lolz your actually scared of global warming. Temps have been flat since 1998 and we’re about to hit a solar minimum, prepare to swallow your shoe.
Kyle, Jeff, the media thing is really hitting me. They definitely are not helping the public. I would not limit it to the New York Times though. It is really a press-wide phenomenon.
All problem begs for a solution. I am thinking of starting a related project on this blog soon. . . Hopefully you can all help take it to a level where it can make a difference.
I’d be happy to help. I have some observations, thoughts, and ideas regarding the media coverage of global warming and its (necessary) improvement.
The media claim to serve the “public interest”, but what does that call for when it comes to an issue such as global warming? I think the necessary media improvements, regarding this issue anyhow, include things ranging from goals and paradigms to daily things like placement and color choice, and probably everything inbetween (certainly the story), all keeping in mind how humans internalize (all the way to the heart) information (in the broad sense of the word).
Cheers.
Thanks Jeff. I will definitely let you know once I make the time to work on this.
The media will not ask global warming questions because big oil, big coal and Ameircans for a ABalanced Energy Future are sponsoring the debates.
Actually, I just watched GOP debate and was surprised by question raised by interviewer regarding global warming. See article I just wrote today ‘Greenblanking, Greenwashing, and Greenwagering’